The Question in the Gosnell Case: Can We Handle The Truth

#Gosnell jury is done for the day. They return tomorrow for Day 9 of deliberations. KEEP PRAYING!!!
— Stand True(@StandTrue) May 9, 2013

Most of the media has ignored it, but there has been a trial in Philadelphia regarding Dr. Kermit Gosnell and the house of horrors he ran which is otherwise known as an abortion clinic. He specialized in late term abortions, past the first trimester, which are very difficult to do because the baby is so large and well developed. It got to a point where he basically had the mothers deliver the babies alive and whole and he would then cut the spinal cord to kill the baby. That, of course, is illegal. American law allows a baby to be killed as long as he or she is still in the womb. That is not murder under the law. But if that same baby takes a breath outside the womb, it is then no longer called abortion. The law considers that to be murder. I would submit that it makes no difference to the baby, but American law doesn't care about that.

The current charges which the jury is considering against Gosnell are the murders of four children and one woman who died as a result of a botched abortion, and over 200 additional charges. Most pro lifers are praying for a guilty plea in this matter. But what would this mean to the pro life movement?

Credit:  www.tldm.org

If Gosnell is found guilty, that will actually make abortion more legitimate in the eyes of the public and the law. A guilty verdict will say that what Gosnell did in his killing field is somehow different than what the "average" abortion clinic does. A guilty verdict in the Gosnell case will enforce the idea that abortion - the killing of a baby inside the womb - is not murder. Granted, most abortion clinics are run in a more "hygienic" manner in that they dispose of the dead babies in a "proper" manner, treating these little human beings as medical waste and not putting their dead bodies in the freezer as Gosnell did or keeping their body parts in jars. Most clinics don't have blood, feces and urine on their walls. Women don't generally deliver their babies into a toilet where the baby is then killed. The abortion tools in most clinics are usually cleaned after each use and venereal diseases are not normally spread between women as happened in Gosnell's office. But the end result is exactly the same: dead babies.

Why are pro abortion proponents trying as hard as they can to run away from Gosnell, telling us that this is not what "reproductive healthcare clinics" are about? Those who support abortion want a guilty verdict. Nancy Pelosi, a strong supporter of abortion, said this in regard to Gosnell:

“I think that whatever went on there — I only know what you all report on it — is really disgusting,” Pelosi replied. “It is really disgusting, and when we talk about reproductive health for women, that’s not what we’re talking about.”

In debating a resolution in the Senate calling for hearings on the Gosnell matter, Senator Barbara Boxer, according to a lifenews.com article, said:  "the problems at the Gosnell abortion clinic were really no different than problems at any other medical clinic."  She actually may be telling the truth, at least in regard to abortion clinics.

Planned Parenthood, which makes its money by killing unborn babies, strongly condemned Gosnell. This is from christianpost.com:

"Planned Parenthood strongly condemns the alleged actions of Kermit Gosnell, and we would condemn any physician or health-care provider who did not follow the law or recklessly endangered the health of others," stated Dayle Steinberg, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Southeastern Pennsylvania, in an article posted on philly.com.

Planned Parenthood somehow doesn't see the irony of that statement. Every abortion "recklessly endangers the health of others" in that every abortion is about killing a baby. This may be a news flash to Planned Parenthood, but killing is basically the definition of "recklessly endangers health."

The public consensus is that Kermit Gosnell is guilty of every single charge against him and is a mass murderer. I most certainly agree with that. However, we need to remember that every abortionist is a mass murderer. Dr. Bernard Nathanson, an abortionist who repented and became actively pro life and converted to Catholicism, estimates he presided over 60,000 deaths. And he was just one abortionist. (You can read about Dr. Nathanson here.) There have been 55+ million abortions in the United States. That would easily average out to tens of thousands of abortions for each abortionist. Dr. Nathanson died in 2011 (his funeral Mass was in St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York City), but if he were still alive, he would be the first to tell you that there is virtually no difference between what he did and the actions of Kermit Gosnell. As I mentioned earlier, the result was exactly the same: dead babies.

The State of Pennsylvania purposely did not inspect Gosnell's clinic for 17 years. Why? Businessinsider.com gives us the answer:

Pennsylvania's health department stopped routine inspections of abortion facilities in the state after Tom Ridge, a pro-choice Republican, became governor in 1995.

Health department lawyers "changed their legal opinions and advice to suit the policy preferences of different governors," health department official Janet Staloski said in grand jury testimony. In this case, she said the state didn't want to be "putting a barrier up to women" who wanted abortions.

In 1999, high-level Pennsylvania officials met to consider starting up regular inspections again but decided not to, state lawyer Kenneth Brody testified, according to the grand jury report. He told the grand jury that officials were concerned that abortion clinics wouldn't meet inspection standards and then there "would be less abortion facilities."

The state's politics-driven policy continued until the gruesome allegations regarding Gosnell came to light.

Abortion clinics were purposely not inspected because officials did not want to take a chance that some would not meet "standards" and as a result, have to be closed down, The only reason the authorities became aware of the nightmare occurring in Gosnell's clinic is because the Feds suspected he was involved in illegal drug trafficking. They raided his clinic and only then discovered the terrible conditions. According to the businessinsider.com article, "They found moaning women covered in blood-stained blankets and jars with severed fetus feet, according to the 281-page grand jury report." This is despite the fact that many women had gone to Planned Parenthood clinics and complained to them about Gosnell. Planned Parenthood, despite their public condemnation of Gosnell, did nothing to follow up on the complaints.

We really shouldn't be shocked at the callousness shown by both the government and Planned Parenthood. They are in the business of killing babies. Do we really think that people who can casually and on a routine basis kill innocent and defenseless unborn babies would have compassion on anyone?

Kathryn Lopez of National Review wrote about a report done by Fox News last week regarding Gosnell. She described the closing arguments which were discussed in the Fox News report as follows:

Bret Baier hosted a special Friday night on Fox News Channel about the Kermit Gosnell trial. (I tweeted some about it, @kathrynlopez.) During it FNC’s Peter Boyer, formerly of The New Yorker, described Gosnell’s defense: He was doing his job. Boyer was in the courtroom and described the defense attorney as having a “Jack Nicholson” “you can’t handle the truth moment.” Essentially: Abortion is ugly, he provided abortions, deal with it. 

Thehill.com gives a further report on the closing argument from Gosnell's attorney.

It will be downright unfair if Dr. Kermit Gosnell is found guilty of murder this week at his abortion-infanticide trial in Philadelphia. His defense attorney made a convincing case in closing arguments that abortion doctors end pregnancies every day, so why single out Gosnell? Perhaps he operated under particularly unsanitary conditions, was singularly incompetent, and committed medical malpractice, but, really, murder?

. . .

Baby killed inside the mother – legal abortion. Very same baby killed seconds later on the other side of the birth canal – murder. In abortion, as in real estate, it’s location, location, location.

Dr. Gosnell tried the legal methods, but he failed at pinpointing the baby’s heart – it requires skill he doesn’t have to delicately guide the needle through a pregnant woman’s belly into the stubbornly beating heart of the unborn baby.

. . .

Oh, the injustice of it all. Doctor in Pennsylvania is charged with a crime for aborting a 25-week baby; doctor in New Jersey gets a good fee for aborting a 25-week fetus. Location, location, location.

. . .

Turns out Gosnell is not alone in the live-birth abortion-infanticides either. A sting operation from LiveAction has shown several other women’s health clinics are willing to let babies die if they accidentally come out alive. Former employees at other clinics have come forward to say they witnessed Gosnell-like practices where they worked, and no one is investigating or prosecuting them.

Credit:  www.parents.com

Gosnell's defense attorney is absolutely right. Gosnell was providing a service that is completely lawful in the United States: killing unborn babies. Yes, he often actually delivered the babies before killing them, but does it really make a difference to the baby whether he is inside or outside his mother's womb when he is killed? Pro abortionists want us to believe there is a vast difference, and a guilty verdict will play right into their hands.

Those who are involved in or supportive of abortion desperately want a guilty verdict in the Gosnell case. A guilty verdict will enable them to point at Gosnell and distance themselves from him, claiming that what they do is not the same. They terminate pregnancies. Gosnell kills babies. A guilty verdict will, in effect, legitimize abortion in the eyes of the public because it will say that abortion and murder are not the same. A guilty verdict will do major damage to the pro life movement.

A not guilty verdict will force Americans to face up to the ugly reality of abortion. If we say that Gosnell's actions - the killing of viable babies - are lawful, then we are admitting that abortion is legally sanctioned murder.

Unless we convict all abortionists - and I do pray for that day - Kermit Gosnell is not guilty under American law. That is the truth we all must handle.

Credit:  www.gospelgifs.com